Motorola Retaliates Against Microsoft Patent Suit

Status
Not open for further replies.

lmn8r

Distinguished
May 27, 2010
7
0
18,510
0
What a waste. If I were the judge i'd issue a summary judgment and order both companies to pay $40 million dollars to charity, and all patents in question are invalidated immediately and in perpetuity.
 

scook9

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2008
826
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]lmn8r[/nom]What a waste. If I were the judge i'd issue a summary judgment and order both companies to pay $40 million dollars to charity, and all patents in question are invalidated immediately and in perpetuity.[/citation]
I like this.
 
G

Guest

Guest
What next, Microsoft sues Plumbing industry for making toilets that use the recycle bin sound font!
 

Parrdacc

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
567
0
18,980
0
This is just Motorola telling Microsoft to back the #$%^ off. Basically, we won't be intimidated and can take you on just the same.
 

Bolbi

Distinguished
Jul 11, 2009
733
0
19,060
43
[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]The computer world would so much better without pattents. Its only purpose is to prevent innovation and fill the pockets of big corporations.[/citation]
No; the purpose of patents is to protect and foster innovation by making sure inventors who do the heavy lifting for new technological advancements can actually reap the benefits of their hard work. Patent law helps protect them from the theft of their intellectual property. The problem is that nowadays patents are too complex and vague and are granted for just about any ridiculous thing that a company can dream up.
 

rocky1234

Distinguished
Sep 9, 2008
130
0
18,680
0
How long has Windows been out & it took Moto this long to figure out that MS may be steeping on Moto's patents I call a bit of BS here for sure. If it is true & Moto wins this the PC world is in for some real headaches. I do not think a Judge in their right mind would even think of letting this go to court there are just way to many players in the PC world that would get hurt by this as well as the consumers.

I really think there should be limits on how long you can sit by & watch your patents being used & not do anything about it.

They want basically back pay for long term infringements that would pretty much almost bankrupt MS or at the very least put a big hole in their pockets there a millions upon millions of PC's in the world. I still call BS on Moto's part & this should never see the light of day in a court room. Both MS & Moto really need to sit down & work this out before it starts effecting everyone else & not just them.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@rocky1234

not all companies exercise their patent rights, some actually believe in allowing the diverse application of their patents as long as it does not adversely affect their market standings, lets say ford allowed the use of stuff they developed to be used on planes, cause there is no way in heck they going be getting into the airplane business. Moto has decided to exercise these patents because MS decided to take Moto to task over violations of some of their patents, it's moto's way of saying hey you want to come back and negotiate those royalties again, this time with reasonable pricing
 

redraider89

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
109
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]rocky1234[/nom]How long has Windows been out & it took Moto this long to figure out that MS may be steeping on Moto's patents I call a bit of BS here for sure.[/citation]

It isn't Motorola's fault. Microsoft started the fight and when you pick on a company that's been around as long as Motorola has, innovating for decades, long before little Billy Gates was pooping in his diapers, you may find out you grabbed the wrong end of the snake. Microsoft may think they are big, but they are just too big for their britches as far as Motorola is concerned.
 

beayn

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
947
0
18,990
1
[citation][nom]lmn8r[/nom]What a waste. If I were the judge i'd issue a summary judgment and order both companies to pay $40 million dollars to charity, and all patents in question are invalidated immediately and in perpetuity.[/citation]

That could be why you aren't a judge :p
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
[citation][nom]rocky1234[/nom]How long has Windows been out & it took Moto this long to figure out that MS may be steeping on Moto's patents I call a bit of BS here for sure. If it is true & Moto wins this the PC world is in for some real headaches. I do not think a Judge in their right mind would even think of letting this go to court there are just way to many players in the PC world that would get hurt by this as well as the consumers. I really think there should be limits on how long you can sit by & watch your patents being used & not do anything about it. They want basically back pay for long term infringements that would pretty much almost bankrupt MS or at the very least put a big hole in their pockets there a millions upon millions of PC's in the world. I still call BS on Moto's part & this should never see the light of day in a court room. Both MS & Moto really need to sit down & work this out before it starts effecting everyone else & not just them.[/citation]

lets assume that the pattents are lisenced out at 1 cent each, up to 5 cents each per license of windows, that would be 16 cents to 80cents a windows, lets say 1 $ for easier math. lets also go back to windows 95 and only comsumer versions, as in 95 98 me xp vista and 7, that would come out to

95 = ?
98 = ?
me = ?
xp = 400
vista = 88 million (2007 number)
7 = 240 million about


at best they will get 16$ a (16 licenses a license of windows) license for back licensing.

and fianly there are allot of electronic pattens, and this is usually how they go. its either its such a basic thing that they dont bother, and never would unless someone pulls a dick move like Microsoft or apple.

if its a major game changing feature, its licensed out, or exchanged for other tech.

 

dman3k

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2009
715
0
18,980
0
Motorola is going down. I'm pretty sure that the judge will be biased and favor the two giants of the industry unless IBM or something backs Motorola.
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
0
19,780
0
The patent system need to be redesigned to the modern age, its a dinosaur in a digital world. There should be no generic patents like todays but rather of a more specific nature. At this rate you can soon patent wiping your a$$ with paper and soon you would be able to wipe your own with dollar bills and thats just wrong!
 

tayb

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
1,143
0
19,280
0
I am sorry but we need to stop giving out software patents. It's getting ridiculous. You can't write a piece of code anymore without infringing on some ridiculous thing that has been patented before. For crying out loud multi-touch was patented. Seriously? The purpose of patents is completely lost if we continue to allow vague software patents to be accepted. Nonsense like this will never end.

I hope the judge throws both of these suits out the Window and orders the lawyers from both companies to be permanently slapped across the face.
 

SAL-e

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
383
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]Bolbi[/nom]No; the purpose of patents is to protect and foster innovation by making sure inventors who do the heavy lifting for new technological advancements can actually reap the benefits of their hard work. Patent law helps protect them from the theft of their intellectual property.[/citation]
First, there is no such a thing like "intellectual property". It is made up propaganda therm by lawyers for the lawyers. There are three different sets of laws: Copyright, Patents and Trade Marks. Only common thing between them is that they are monopolies legalized by the government. So if you like to come with common therm for them it is "Intellectual Monopolies".

Second, Saying that MONOPOLIES promote innovation is like saying that "Credit promotes wealth." Credit only allows you to spend money now, that might be earned later and you pay dear price in the form of interest for that "convenience". So my questions are:
What is 'the interest' we pay for using the patent system and is it worthed at all?
 
G

Guest

Guest
@SAL-e

guess intel better just hand over all their non existent research and IP over to AMD then....

personally i think lawyers are low life too but denying the protection of IP is kind of silly
 

SAL-e

Distinguished
Feb 4, 2009
383
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]aBitOverBoard[/nom]@SAL-e ...but denying the protection of IP is kind of silly[/citation]
The "Credit" could be very useful tool, but we all know what happens when the tool is used incorrectly. You are going to be bankrupt.
Monopoly, in form of the patent, is a tool also, the problem is that currently we are using this tool incorrectly because we are ASSUMING it helps, but nobody actually have proved that. Also today, you have choice to use credit or not, but we don't have choice in using patent system or not.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@SAL-e

patents do not protect your research, it protects the by product of your research, the end result as it were, i guess you can try to patent a method for conducting research but that's kind of restricting your research, usually the actual research you undertook to derive your end product can not be protected by a patent, it is very important because if a company wanted to replicate a patented idea without paying royalties, if they can get hold of the research they can reverse engineer a product that could perform similarly without breaching the patent, therefore the research is protected by IP

A very good example of this is material selection, a company can sink significant money into testing the durability and performance characteristics of a material for a given application, another company can bypass all the cost involved and bid significantly lower then the company that undertook the research if they can get a copy of the numbers relating to that research, IP protection is to prevent the original company from being penalized for undertaking the research, the second company would have to pay the original company money or undertake the research themselves

patent != IP
 

dirgle

Distinguished
Feb 8, 2010
18
0
18,510
0
Good for Motorola. Microsoft tried to force them to a bargaining table by firing off that first lawsuit. A tactic of bad form to try and get the upper hand at the negotiating table. Motorola wasn't intimidated and said we can play that game to. Now that Motorola has stood their ground Microsoft will back off on the original lawsuit and this will end at the negotiating table with both company's understanding its equal ground. Not Microsoft's usual bully tactic of give us a good price for using out technology or well sue you out of business.

I'm glad to see a company stand their ground in a situation like this. The patent wars need to stop. But it's not, when intimidation works so well to get company's to crumble at the negotiating table. Stand your ground and make peace.
 

Vladislaus

Distinguished
Jul 29, 2010
1,290
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]Bolbi[/nom]No; the purpose of patents is to protect and foster innovation by making sure inventors who do the heavy lifting for new technological advancements can actually reap the benefits of their hard work. Patent law helps protect them from the theft of their intellectual property. The problem is that nowadays patents are too complex and vague and are granted for just about any ridiculous thing that a company can dream up.[/citation]
And this is the reason we're better of without it.
Another flaw in the patent system is that you don't need to be the inventor of a technology to patent it. Also one should only be able to patent something if at has a prototype for the technology.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS